Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).

Lifted from another thread so as not to derail it. The claim that it would be a waste of resources to gas and cremate;

SnakeDoctor wrote:Even if there were mass graves, it wouldn't prove that they were gassed but it would be a start. The official narrative would have us believe that while Germany was fighting a two front war against the whole rest of the civilized world they also had time and resources to mass exterminate large numbers of Jews, bury them, dig them back up and then cremate them in huge pits and then cover them up again leaving virtually no trace. 70 years later and we can't get a definitive answer to whether or not these mass graves even exist. But yet they would have us believe it just because it's hateful not to believe in WWII anti German war propaganda. Let's see the mass grave evidence first, then we can worry about whether they were gassed or died from typhus or other causes.

So, if that was a waste of resources then that means you must accept that the Nazis had the resources to transport, feed, accommodate and imprison (so thousands of camp staff and guards are also a drain on resource) about 5 to 5.5 million Jews in 1944-5 as the war was coming to an end. The resources to do that would be massive compared to the gassing etc.

Drain on manpower is more what I meant. Since you brought that up though. It looks like the Nazis did just that. They transported these prisoners, fed them, gave them haircuts, new clothes and new shoes to save them from typhus. The allies bombed all the transportation routes towards the end of the war. If Jews died of typhus and starvation in greater numbers towards the end of the war perhaps you should be blaming the allies instead of the Nazis.

SnakeDoctor wrote:Drain on manpower is more what I meant. Since you brought that up though. It looks like the Nazis did just that. They transported these prisoners, fed them, gave them haircuts, new clothes and new shoes to save them from typhus. The allies bombed all the transportation routes towards the end of the war. If Jews died of typhus and starvation in greater numbers towards the end of the war perhaps you should be blaming the allies instead of the Nazis.

That is a massive drain on resources way beyond killing them would have been. Now do you understand that your drain on resources argument, used to say they would not have been killed, is faulty?

Did you not read my last response? I see why others have a problem with you Nessie. Your arguments are not very logical. So much in fact, that often times I have to remind myself that you're a male. No offense to the logical females on here.

I did read your response and was shifting off the topic of a drain on resources, not just manpower, but the resources required to cloth, feed and treat them when they have typhus etc. Would you answer my question please.

You started the thread. My contention is that they did use resources to save lives. You started the thread to emphasize a poor choice of words that I used and to somehow postulate that since it would be much easier to gass millions of Jews than to feed them and disinfect their living environments then they must have done so. The evidence suggests the opposite though. So you might as well delete the thread if you're just going to use a gotcha moment to support nonsense. You don't have any evidence that they were gassed and people on this site more knowledgeable than me have been destroying your arguments for the last 2 or 3 weeks that I've been here.

Your contention was The Nazis would not use resources to gas, bury, exhume and cremate. That was no a poor choice of words, it was you clear opinion. I have not then suggested if not A, therefore B as you claim. I have just pointed out it is a flawed argument and it should not be used.

I have lots of evidence people were gassed at AR camps. The alleged destruction of that evidence is just a series of fallacies and tactics in lieu of evidence to the contrary.

Nessie has testimony from proven liars. That's Nessie's "evidence." Nessie also claims that the lies of holyhoaxers are permissible and that holyhoax lies are just "hyperbole." Or, exaggerations. Or, theatrical overstatement. Nothing ever said about the holyhoax is a lie according to Nessie.

Turnagain wrote:Nessie has testimony from proven liars. That's Nessie's "evidence." Nessie also claims that the lies of holyhoaxers are permissible and that holyhoax lies are just "hyperbole." Or, exaggerations. Or, theatrical overstatement. Nothing ever said about the holyhoax is a lie according to Nessie.